memory_sync

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behaviors: push vs pull vs both, gateway discovery sync, prerequisites, and return format (counts and errors). No contradictions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Concise, well-structured with Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value; no redundancy. Front-loaded with purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Covers purpose, usage, parameters, return values, and prerequisites. Minor gap: gateway_discovery enabling not explained. Otherwise complete for a simple sync tool with no output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema has 0% description coverage, but description fully explains the `direction` parameter including all options, default value, and explicit mapping (push, pull, both). Adds complete meaning beyond schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states 'Sync memories with Nostr relays' and distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., memory_edit, memory_query) by specifying the network sync aspect. No other sibling tool covers syncing with relays.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides clear context: direction options, prerequisites (secp256k1 for push), and behavior. Could be improved by explicitly stating when not to use, but no competing sibling tool exists.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.